1,492
edits
Andrei.boiu (talk | contribs) |
Andrei.boiu (talk | contribs) |
||
| Line 110: | Line 110: | ||
What will you achieve by using the default option of a very high resolution? As it seems, there are some minor issues. The highest resolution image does not show necessarily more detail, on close inspection, and may exhibit whitish fringes near the edges of objects. This is due to heavy contrast enhancing processing that leaves such artifacts, reaching an image that is not better from a lower resolution one while it occupies more storage space and makes editing slower. | What will you achieve by using the default option of a very high resolution? As it seems, there are some minor issues. The highest resolution image does not show necessarily more detail, on close inspection, and may exhibit whitish fringes near the edges of objects. This is due to heavy contrast enhancing processing that leaves such artifacts, reaching an image that is not better from a lower resolution one while it occupies more storage space and makes editing slower. | ||
The best approach is to evaluate, separately, each resolution and format, on the same scene and subject, to determine which one works best. A common approach is to notice the format and resolution. Let's say at the 4:3 aspect ratio you have 64MP and 9268x6936 resolution, while at 3:4 aspect ratio you get and 16MP and 4624x3468 resolution. As a rule o thumb, the maximum resolution is never the actual sensor output and | The best approach is to evaluate, separately, each resolution and format, on the same scene and subject, to determine which one works best. A common approach is to notice the format and resolution. Let's say at the 4:3 aspect ratio you have 64MP and 9268x6936 resolution, while at 3:4 aspect ratio you get and 16MP and 4624x3468 resolution. As a rule o thumb, the maximum resolution is never the actual sensor output and at lower resolutions the camera has a reduced risk of post-processing artifacts. Moving further up the options list, the so-called full resolution has a 4:2 format and is 4624x2084 and while the 16:9 one is 4624x2604. | ||
In this vast array of possibilities you cannot know which format is the best unless you take photos in daylight, preferably with sun-rays that are occluded by some obstacles yet shine through other areas. If there areas where the light | In this vast array of possibilities you cannot know which format is the best unless you take photos in daylight, preferably with sun-rays that are occluded by some obstacles yet shine through other areas. If there areas where the light shine brightly are under-saturated and the whole picture has little detail, you may need to select a broader image format, such as 4:2 instead of the typical 4:3 to have enough hinting on an overexposed picture and adjust accordingly. If the image has closer vertical and horizontal resolution there may be less of chance to see how far the light that affects your scene is coming from the unused sides of the sensor. This issue is much more common as you may expect while it also seems elusive, as what you don't see in the picture actually affects your end results. | ||
<code>''Understand what formats and resolution capability your smartphone camera exposes and make extensive tests in scenes that have intense light as well as relatively dim areas Try exactly the same framing on different image formats and notice which one looks better.''</code> | <code>''Understand what formats and resolution capability your smartphone camera exposes and make extensive tests in scenes that have intense light as well as relatively dim areas Try exactly the same framing on different image formats and notice which one looks better.''</code> | ||